Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

New Directions in Medical Liability Reform

  • Chapter
Medical Malpractice

Abstract

Medical malpractice is the “Rip van Winkle” issue in American health care. However, its periodic awakenings depart from those of its fictional counterpart in an important respect. Neither the participants in the medical malpractice system nor outside observers seem aware that the context for minimizing medical errors, improving legal dispute resolution, and keeping liability insurance available and affordable has changed. This chapter explains why the public policy of medical malpractice is so poorly connected to overall health policy. It examines three aspects of health system change since the 1970s—medical progress, industrialization, and cost containment—that have exposed serious weaknesses in the medical liability system. It suggests ways to convert liability into a general health policy issue, including having the federal government implement a system of error identification, fair compensation, and efficient dispute resolution that would apply to Medicare and Medicaid patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. De Ville K. Medical malpractice in twentieth century United States: The interaction of technology, law and culture, Internat J Technol Assessment in Health Care 1998;14(2):197–211.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Mohr JC. American medical malpractice litigation in historical perspective. JAMA 2000;283(13): 1731–1737.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Maurer H. The M.D.’s are off their pedestal. Fortune, Feb.1954:138–186.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Silvers JB. The role of the capital markets in restructuring health care. J Health Pol Policy Law 2001; 26(5):1019–1030.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Viscusi WK. Corporate risk analysis: a reckless act? Stanford Law Rev 2000;52(3): 547–597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Danzon PM, Pauly MV, Kington RS. The effects of malpractice litigation on physicians’ fees and incomes. AEA Papers Proc 1990;80(2):122–127.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Grumbach K, Peltzman-Rennie D, Luft HS. Charges for Obstetric Liability Insurance and Discontinuation of Obstetric Practice in New York. Report to the Office of Technology Assessment. Washington, DC: Office of Technology Assessment, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Urban Institute. Medical Malpractice: Problems & Reforms—A Policy-Maker’s Guide to Issues and Information. Washington, DC: Urban Institute; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Danzon PM. Liability for medical malpractice. In: Handbook of Health Economics, 1B. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier;2000.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Regan LJ. Medicine and the law. N Engl J Med 1954;250:463.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Harvard Medical Practice Study Group. Patients, Doctors, and Lawyers: Medical Injury, Malpractice Litigation, and Patient Compensation in New York. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ; 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Brennan TA, Sox CM, Burstin HR. Relation between negligent adverse events and the outcomes of medical malpractice litigation. N Engl J Med 1996;335: 1963–1967.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Mello MM, Brennan TA. Deterrence of medical errors: theory and evidence for malpractice reform. Texas Law Rev 2002; 80(7):1595–1637.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Leape LL. Error in medicine. JAMA 1994;272(23):1851–1857.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Institute of Medicine. Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS, eds. To Err is Human: Building a Safe Health System. Washington, DC: Nat Acad Press, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: Nat Acad Press, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Latham, SR. System and responsibility: Three readings of the IOM report on medical error. Am J Law Med 2001;27(2&3):163–179.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Brennan TA. The Institute of Medicine report on medical errors—could it do harm? N Engl J Med 2000;342:1123–1125.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Rubin RJ, Mendelson DN. Defensive Medicine and Medical Liability Reform: Estimating Costs and Potential Savings. Fairfax, VA: Lewin-VHI, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Bovbjerg RR, Dubay LC, Kenney GM, et al. Defensive medicine and tort reform: new evidence in old bottles. J Health Polit Policy Law 1996;21:267–288.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Klingman D, Localio AR, Sugarman J, et al. Measuring defensive medicine using clinical scenario surveys. J Health Polit Policy Law 1996;21:185–217.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Kessler D, McClellan M. Do doctors practice defensive medicine? Q J Econ 1996; 111(2):353–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Burstin HR, Johnson WG, Lipsitz SR, et al. Do the poor sue more? A casecontrol study of malpractice claims and socioeconomic status. JAMA 1993;270(14):1697–1701.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Hofflander AE, Nye BF, Nettesheim JD. Report on the Medical Malpractice Insurance Delivery System in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Trial Lawyers Association, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Mehlman MJ. Resolving the Medical Malpractice Crisis: Fairness Considerations. The Pew Charitable Trusts’ Project on Medical Liability in Pennsylvania; 2003 (monograph available at Website: http://www.medliabilitypa.org; accessed 5/26/04).

  26. Beckman HB, Markakis KM, Suchman AL, et al. The doctor-patient relationship and malpractice: lessons from patient depositions. Arch Intern Med 1994;154(12): 1365–1370.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Huycke LI, Huycke MM. Characteristics of potential plaintiffs in malpractice litigation. Ann Intern Med 1994;120(9):792–798.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Vincent C, Young M, Phillips A. Why do people sue doctors? A study of patients and relatives taking legal action. Lancet 1994;343:1609–1613.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Dauer EA, Marcus LJ. Adapting mediation to link resolution of medical malpractice disputes with health care quality improvement. Law Contemp Probl 1997; 60(1):185–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Fisher R, Eury W. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. New York, NY: Penguin, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Mello MM, Kelly CN, Studdert DM, et al. Hospital behavior in a tort crisis: observations from Pennsylvania. Health Aff 2003;22(6):225–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Kinney ED. Malpractice reform in the 1990s: past disappointments, future success? J Health Polit Policy Law 1995;20(1):99–135

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. American College of Physicians. Beyond MICRA: new ideas for liability reform. Ann Intern Med 1995; 122(6):466–473.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Gold JA. Wiser than the laws?: The legal accountability of the medical profession. Am J Law Med 1981; 7(2):145–181.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Institute of Medicine. Leadership by Example: Coordinating Government Roles in Improving Health Care Quality. (Corrigan JM, Eden J, Smith BM, eds.), Washington, DC: Nat Acad Press; 2002a.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Struve CD. Expertise in Medical Malpractice Litigation: Special Courts, Screening Panels, and Other Options. The Pew Charitable Trusts’ Project on Medical Liability in Pennsylvania; 2003 (monograph available at Website: http://www.medliabilitypa.org; accessed 5/26/04).

  37. Howard PK. Yes, It’s a Mess—But Here’s How to Fix It. Time Magazine, June 9, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Mello MM, Hemenway D. Medical Malpractice As an Epidemiological Problem. Soc Sci Med 2004;59(1): 39–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Sugarman S. Doing away with tort law. California Law Rev 1985;73:555–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Bovbjerg, RR, Sloan FA. No-fault for medical injury: Theory and evidence. Univ Cincinnati Law Rev 1998; 67(1):53–123.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Johnson SM. The case for medical malpractice mediation. J Med Law 2000;5: 21–31.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Hyman CS, Liebman CB. Using mediation skills to manage disclosure of medical errors and adverse events. Health Aff 2004;23(4).

    Google Scholar 

  43. O’Connell J. Offers that can’t be refused: Foreclosure of personal injury claims by defendants’ prompt tender of claimants’ net economic losses. Northwestern Univ Law Rev 1982; 77(5):589–632.

    Google Scholar 

  44. US Department of Health and Human Services. Confronting the New Health Care Crisis: Improving Health Care Quality and Lowering Costs By Fixing Our Medical Liability System. Online. Available at Website: http://aspe.hhs.gov/daltcp/reports/litrefm.pdf; accessed on Oct. 1, 2002.

  45. Sloan FA. The road from medical injury to claims resolution: how no-fault and tort differ. Law Contemp Probl 1997;60(2):35–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. O’Connell, J. Neo-no-fault remedies for medical injuries: coordinated statutory and contractual alternatives. Law Contemp Probl 1986;49(2):125–141.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Tancredi L, Bovbjerg R. Rethinking responsibility for patient injury: acceleratedcompensation events, a malpractice and quality reform ripe for a test. Law Contemp Problems 1991;54(2):147–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Bovbjerg RR, Sloan FA, Blumstein JF. Valuing life and limb in tort: scheduling “pain and suffering.” Northwestern Univ Law Rev 1989;83(4):908–976.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Sage WM. Principles, pragmatism, and medical injury. JAMA 2001;286:226–228.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Sloan FA, van Wert SS. Cost and compensation of injury in medical malpractice. Law Contemp Problems 1991;54(1):131–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Studdert DM, Thomas EJ, Zbar BIW, et al. Can the United States afford a “no-fault” system of compensation for medical injury?” Law Contemp Problems 1997;60(2): 1–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Studdert DM, Brennan TA. Toward a workable model of “no-fault” compensation for medical injury in the United States. Am J Law Med 2001;27(2&3):225–252.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Blendon RJ, DesRoches CM, Brodie M, et al. Views of practicing physicians and the public on medical error. New Engl J Med 2002;347(24):1933–1940.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Sage WM. Managed care’s Crimea: Medical necessity, therapeutic coverage, and the goals of administrative process in health insurance. Duke Law J 2003; 53: 593–666.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Sage WM, Hastings KE, Berenson RA. Enterprise liability for medical malpractice and health care quality improvement. Am J Law Med 1994;20(1&2):1–28.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Sage WM. Enterprise liability and the emerging managed health care system. Law Contemp Probl 1997; 60(2):159–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Abraham KS, Weiler PC. Enterprise medical liability and the evolution of the American health care system. Harvard Law Rev 1994;108:381–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Havighurst CC. Vicarious liability: relocating responsibility for the quality of medical care. Am J Law Med 2000;26:7–29.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Arlen J, MacLeod WB. Malpractice liability for physicians and managed care organizations. NYU Law Rev 2003;78:1929–2006.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Gosfield AG. Making quality happen: in search of legal weightlessness. In: Gosfield AG (ed.), 2002 Health Law Handbook. Deerfield, IL: Clark Boardman Callaghan, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Grol R. Improving the quality of medical care: building bridges among professional pride, payer profit, and patient satisfaction. JAMA 2001;286:2578–2585.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Studdert DM, Brennan TA. The problem of punitive damages in lawsuits against managed-care organizations. New Eng J Med 2000;342(4):280–284.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Havighurst CC. Health Care Choices: Private Contracts as Instruments of Health Reform Washington, DC: AEI Press, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Sage WM, Jorling JM. A world that won’t stand still: enterprise liability by private contract. DePaul Law Rev 1994;43(4):1007–1043.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Asch DA, Parker RM. The Libby Zion case. New Eng J Med 1988;318(12): 771–775.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Sage WM. Regulating through information: disclosure laws and American health care. Columbia Law Rev 1999;99:1701–1829.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Hall MA, Dugan E., Zheng B, et al. Trust in physicians and medical institutions: what is it, can it be measured, and does it matter? Milbank Q 2001;79:613–633.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Hickson GV, Federspiel CF, Pichert JW, et al. Patient complaints and malpractice risk. JAMA 2002; 287(22):2951–2957.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Rosenthal M, Schlesinger M. Not afraid to blame: the neglected role of blame attribution in medical consumerism and some implications for health policy. Milbank Q 2002;80:41–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Zivin JG. Pfaff ASP. To err on humans is not benign: incentives for adoption of medical error reporting systems. Columbia University Department of Economics Working Paper, July 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Liang BA. The adverse event of unaddressed medical error: identifying and filling the holes in the health-care and legal systems. J Law Med Ethics 2001;29: 346–368.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Gostin L. A public health approach to reducing error: medical malpractice as a barrier. JAMA 2000; 283:1742,1743.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Zivin JG, Pfaff ASP. To err on humans is not benign: incentives for adoption of medical error reporting systems. Working Paper 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Institute of Medicine, Fostering Rapid Advances in Health Care: Learning from System Demonstrations, (Corrigan JM, Greiner A, Erickson SM, eds.), Washington, DC: Nat Acad Press; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Bovbjerg RR, Miller RH, Shapiro DW. Paths to reducing medical injury: professional liability and discipline vs. patient safety—and the need for a third way. J Law Med Ethics 2001;29:369–380.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Cohen JR. Apology and organizations: exploring an example from medical practice. Fordham Urban Law J 2000;27(5):1447–1482.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Studdert DM, Brennan TA. No-fault compensation for medical injuries: the prospect for error prevention. JAMA 2002;286(2):217–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Columbia Law School, New York, NY

    William M. Sage MD, JD (Professor of Law)

Authors
  1. William M. Sage MD, JD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. The Doctors Company, Napa, CA

    Richard E. Anderson MD, FACP (Chairman and Chief Executive Officer) (Chairman and Chief Executive Officer)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Humana Press Inc., Totowa, NJ

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sage, W.M. (2005). New Directions in Medical Liability Reform. In: Anderson, R.E. (eds) Medical Malpractice. Humana Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59259-845-8_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59259-845-8_17

  • Publisher Name: Humana Press

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-58829-389-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-59259-845-8

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation